Re: [homenet] Multiple routers in the home

On 5/11/19 01:13, Walter H. wrote: > On 11.05.2019 09:31, Jan Newmarch wrote: >> I'm new to this list so may cover old ground, be off topic, etc. Feel >> free to shoot me down! >> >> Barbara Stark writes [homenet rechartering, meetings, and code} >> >>     Multiple routers just for the purpose of

Re: [homenet] RFC 7788 and ".home"

On 7/20/16 12:24 PM, Andrew Sullivan wrote: > On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 06:05:54AM -0400, Brian Haberman wrote: >> If the above holds, I would suggest (only partly in jest) a TLD that >> contains a certain unicode value that can be visually displayed by an OS... >> >>

Re: [homenet] RFC 7788 and ".home"

On 7/18/16 5:01 PM, Ted Lemon wrote: > Yup. In terms of minimizing risk to the IETF, switching to .homenet is > expedient--that's why I put it in the Homenet Naming/Service Discovery > Architecture doc. Perhaps some homenet participants aren't aware of > the issues surrounding this. > The

Re: [homenet] Which IP addresses must be avoided?

On 5/17/16 9:49 AM, Joe Touch wrote: > > > On 5/17/2016 9:35 AM, Ray Bellis wrote: >> However some operators have (had?) "classful" firewall rules that >> prohibit packets that come from IP addresses that would have been >> considered a broadcast address in a pre-CIDR world. > > It's been 23

Re: [homenet] [94attendees] IPv6 Prefix delegation on IETF network, please ?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 11/3/15 6:45 PM, Michael Richardson wrote: > Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: >> However, a number of ISPs (including the IETF, it seems) do not >> allow prefix delegation. > > No, that's not correct. The IETF NOC team

Re: [homenet] FW: [hackathon] RIOT@IETF 93 Hackathon

On 5/6/15 9:51 PM, Michael Richardson wrote: Ted Lemon mel...@fugue.com wrote: Ray and I were just discussing this today. We'd be thrilled to support homenet-related work at the hackathon in any way we can as chairs. Ideas? Really good to hear from you, Mark. One

Re: [homenet] Routing protocol comparison document

On 2/19/15 9:22 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: smart rate limiting. ISIS already has these kinds of rate-limiting of how things are happening. In modern core routers this is often tuned If you need to tune it, it's not smart enough. To be fair, network operators have somewhat different

Re: [homenet] A poll

On 2/20/15 8:50 AM, Dave Taht wrote: The homenet working group has been laboring for several years now to find ways to make ipv6 more deployable to home (and presumably small business) users. In addition to multiple specification documents some code has been produced to try and make things

Re: [homenet] sorting out the right ipv6 addr to choose and name in a source specific world

On 12/18/14 4:39 PM, Jim Gettys wrote: On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 7:19 PM, Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com mailto:brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com wrote: On 19/12/2014 11:22, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: Shouldn't we reduce the amount of cross-posting at some point?

Re: [homenet] Clarification on Routing Thoughts

On 8/1/14 4:32 AM, Henning Rogge wrote: I think Joël's reluctance about hopcount qualifying the gig-e/wifi choice may change if considering wifi-ac instead. I.e. hopcount may be good to qualify a choice between Gigabit Ethernet and Gigabit wifi. Measuring any kind of wifi connection just

Re: [homenet] Clarification on Routing Thoughts

On 7/31/14 9:03 PM, Michael Richardson wrote: Ted Lemon mel...@fugue.com wrote: It seems to me that you are grasping for a use case to justify a split where none is needed. Protocols like OSPF, IS-IS and Babel would all work in both environments. RIP won't. So this seems

Re: [homenet] Updates to Homenet Architecture Principles doc

On 6/17/14, 10:38 AM, ietfdbh wrote: -Original Message- From: homenet [mailto:homenet-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Alexandru Petrescu [...] I suppose parents will likely ask the IPv6 specialists something like this: - should I click on '6rd' or '6to4' or on 'DHCPv6' or on

Re: [homenet] Please review the No IPv4 draft

On 4/16/14, 6:40 AM, Simon Perreault wrote: Le 2014-04-16 09:07, Michael Richardson a écrit : Ideally the device will not announce an IPv4 default route if it hasn't got one itself. The fact is that all CPE routers today do announce an IPv4 default route to the LAN irrespective of their WAN

Re: [homenet] [dnssd] IETF-89 WG meeting minutes

On 4/4/14, 11:41 AM, Douglas Otis wrote: On Apr 4, 2014, at 9:54 AM, joel jaeggli joe...@bogus.com wrote: On 4/4/14, 9:45 AM, Don Sturek wrote: Hi Douglas, I fail to see how turning all devices in a home into a flat link local-addressed architecture meets the requirments in the homenet

Re: [homenet] [dnssd] IETF-89 WG meeting minutes

On 4/4/14, 9:45 AM, Don Sturek wrote: Hi Douglas, I fail to see how turning all devices in a home into a flat link local-addressed architecture meets the requirments in the homenet charter (http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/homenet/charter/), particularly around home/guest networks plus a few

Re: [homenet] [DNSOP] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-mglt-homenet-dnssec-validator-dhc-options-02.txt

On Oct 22, 2013, at 9:01 AM, Ted Lemon mel...@fugue.com wrote: On Oct 22, 2013, at 11:29 AM, Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com wrote: Since this is homenet, oughtn't we be thinking in terms of getting configuration information from things that we believe we ought to always trust, like, oh say, a

Re: [homenet] NPTv6-only home networks

challenges to make their toolchain work across more than one subnet. -Original Message- From: Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com Date: Friday, February 22, 2013 7:24 AM To: Joel Jaeggli joe...@bogus.com Cc: Lorenzo Colitti lore...@google.com, Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.ca, Mark Townsley

Re: [homenet] NPTv6-only home networks

On 2/22/13 7:24 AM, Michael Thomas wrote: joel jaeggli wrote: On 2/21/13 7:04 PM, Michael Thomas wrote: So, I think what we can observe from the number of readily discoverable security cameras on the internet. was that the real-live requirement was at least partially solved thanks to upnp

Re: [homenet] Running code in Orlando

On 2/20/13 7:49 PM, David Lamparter wrote: On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 12:40:25PM +0900, Lorenzo Colitti wrote: On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 12:16 PM, Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.cawrote: Would/could another foot of such a network be on the IETF network? If the IETF network didn't respond

Re: [homenet] prefix assignment on home networks

On 11/15/12 9:27 AM, STARK, BARBARA H wrote: Chiming in as a consumer... [the views represented are 100% my own, individual, consumer perspective] I'm a consumer of wireless service. I hear people engaged in wireless networks saying things like Prefix delegation isn't till 3GPP release 10; the

Re: [homenet] prefix assignment on home networks

On 11/15/12 10:41 AM, STARK, BARBARA H wrote: But when (single stack) IPv6 gets offered on that tether, that router will only have a single /128 address. Hmm. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-byrne-v6ops-64share-03 is one proposal. Which, I suspect, is how the router would get that single

Re: [homenet] prefix assignment on home networks

On 11/13/12 9:20 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: Why do you believe we need coordination between service providers to permit multihomed services to work well? I thought the whole idea was to handle multiple upstream prefixes and make sure everything is routed to the correct ISP? If

Re: [homenet] Unicast DNS within the Homenet?

On 9/12/12 10:35 PM, Ray Hunter wrote: Fair counter point to my suggestion. Enterprises don't generally put laptops in public viewable DNS. Isn't your requirement to support highly mobile devices a good reason to avoid mDNS wherever possible? MDNS has a purpose, which is to locate on-link

Re: [homenet] Unicast DNS within the Homenet?

On 9/10/12 6:41 PM, james woodyatt wrote: On Sep 10, 2012, at 05:34 , Ray Bellis ray.bel...@nominet.org.uk wrote: An interesting question has come up during the Arch Doc team's discussions around naming and service discovery: What in-home services actually require Unicast DNS lookup? [*]

Re: [homenet] one IAB quotation on walled gardens

On 3/29/12 21:18 , Brian E Carpenter wrote: Front posting: I think we are using walled garden to mean several things and that is confusing. In my mind it refers to a captive customer scenario where a service provider is intentionally limiting a customer's access to the global Internet or

Re: [homenet] other routing options

On 11/23/11 10:06 , Ray Hunter wrote: IMHO increasing use of (overlapping) (low power) wireless networks in Homenet will only make count to infinity type problems more common, as marginal adjacencies come and go. You mean 6lowpan type networks? I thought we had consensus to draw

Re: [homenet] secret sharing among devices

plugging things into things seems like a rather short-sightt requirement for a relationship. joel On 11/15/11 12:13 , Stephen [kiwin] Palm wrote: My phone cannot mount usb devices. Have nio interest to remove the sdcard --- Stephen [kiwin] Palm Ph.D. W:

Re: [homenet] pervasive v4

On 11/15/11 13:49 , Lorenzo Colitti wrote: On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 11:04, Erik Nordmark nordm...@cisco.com mailto:nordm...@cisco.com wrote: On 11/14/11 6:19 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: Yes, but then we're extending v4 and expecting homenets to run (presumably) RIP.

Re: [homenet] secret sharing among devices

On 11/15/11 14:14 , Ted Lemon wrote: On Nov 15, 2011, at 1:43 PM, Joel jaeggli joe...@bogus.com wrote: A decade and a half worth of bluetooth security associations including really bad ones says otherwise. Yes, and the reason it works is because for most devices, there is no security

Re: [homenet] security question for zeroconf stuff inside the homenet...

On 10/11/11 18:38 , Ted Lemon wrote: On Oct 11, 2011, at 9:03 PM, Michael Richardson wrote: However, I am thinking that we can perhaps bootstrap equipment that has never been configured (or has been factory reset) in some fashion such that if the equipment is virginal that it can essentially

Re: [homenet] Homenet Architecture Interim Meeting

On 10/7/11 12:55 , Curtis Villamizar wrote: In message 4e8ea2e8.6000...@bogus.com Joel jaeggli writes: On 10/4/11 16:17 , james woodyatt wrote: On Oct 3, 2011, at 9:00 PM, Thomas Herbst wrote: There will be wide area network providers who interwork with the home network but do